Historia ordinis predicatorum in Dacia is a Dominican chronicle from the middle
of the thirteenth century. In regard of its content, it consists of three
parts. First part tells the story of the first arrival of Friars Preachers in
Scandinavia, and of the first convent foundations in Sigtuna and Lund. Second
part presents the first priors provincial. In the third part, the two attempts
to establish a convent in Tallinn are described; therefore, the chronicle is
thought to originate from Tallinn. At least the second part indicates to have
been written in 1261, as it knows about the death of Prior Provincial Absalon, who died on 10 April 1261, but not the name of his
successor Fr. Augustin, probably elected around 8
September 1261 (Halvorsen 2002, pp. 223 and 253). As
a possible author, at least of the third part, the first prior of the convent
in Tallinn, Fr. Daniel, has been suggested (Halvorsen
2002, p. 223).

The original manuscript is long lost. A
fourteenth-century transcript entitled De ordine
Prædicatorum de Tolosa in Dania ann. 1246 propagato was preserved in the Arnamagnæan Collectionin
Copenhagen until 1728, when it was destroyed in the great city fire. Before that,
Thomas Bartholin (†1690) had made a transcript of the chronicle for his Collectanea,
which was, however, lost in the fire too. Fortunately, a third transcript based
on Bartholin’s transcript was saved by the collector and editor Jacob Langebek (†1775) for his ambitious publication series Scriptores
Rerum Danicarum, and this version was published by P.F. Suhm in 1783 in SRD
vol. V, pp. 500-502, as “Historia Ordinis Prædicatorum seu Dominicanorum in
Dania 1216-1246”. In addition, parts of the Historia...
has been published in various Scandinavian diplomataria.

Yet
another transcript of the chronicle has survived through the hand of Hans
Svanning (†1584). He appears, though, to have used the manuscript
somewhat freely in his own version “Quomodo ordo prædicatorum venerit in
Danicum”, which is preserved in the Royal Library, Copenhagen. In the early
twentieth century, Martin Clarentius Gertz (†1919)
took it upon him to recreate the original chronicle based on the two extant
transcripts, and the result was published in Scriptores minores historiæ
danicæ vol. II, pp. 370-374, from 1918-20. Whereas the grand master of
Dominican history in Scandinavia, Jarl Gallén (1946), used Gertz’ version in
his work, later historians tend to be rather critical towards it, as Gertz in
some places might have been more creative than just recreative.

A
new attempt to recreate the original manuscript from the transcripts and all
later interpretations has recently been carried out by Dominican historian
Simon Tugwell OP and published in 1996-2000 with critical comments in Archivum
Fratrum Predicatorum vol. 66, pp. 162-164 (part 1), vol. 68, pp. 111-112
(part 3), and vol. 70, p. 87. Shortly after, Tugwell’s version was included in
Per Bjørn Halvorsen’s book on Dominikus (Halvorsen 2002, pp. 218-220).
The present presentation of Historia... is based on the versions by
Langebek and Tugwell, provided with numerous notes to point out differences and
various interpretative possibilities, as well as more explanatory comments to
the historical information in the chronicle.

The chronicle, which is of course written in Latin,
has until now been translated to German, French and Norwegian (Scheeben 1927, pp. 364-366; Halvorsen 1995, pp. 249-265;
Halvorsen 2002, pp. 220-222).As far as I am aware, this is the
first translation into Danish, which aims to make the chronicle available to a
larger Danish audience than hitherto.

[1]Translation
of the word Dacia is often problematic, not least in regard of Dominican
history, as medieval texts use it for both the kingdom of Denmark and for the
entire region of Scandinavia. In this last sense, Dacia became the
official name for the Nordic provinces of both the Dominicans and the
Franciscans, which besides Denmark included the kingdoms of Norway and Sweden,
as well as the duchies of Schleswig, Finland and Estonia. If any of the orders
had established convents on Iceland - or Greenland even - that would have been
‘Dacian’ too. Until now, all transcripts have in their titles changed Dacia
to some form of Dania, a post-medieval term for Denmark alone, but in my
oppinion, this is wrong, as the chronicle clearly includes Sweden and Estonia
too - and to some degree even Norway - and with the list of the first priors
provincials, it is evidently concerned with the entire province of Dacia.

[2] According
to the chronicle, Provost Gaufred was in Rome to collect the pallium for the
newly appointed Archbishop Olov of Uppsala. However, Olov did not receive papal
approval until January 1224, and his predecessor Valerius was still alive in
the autumn of 1220, so if the Sigtuna provost indeed was in Rome in 1220, the
occasion must have been something else - possibly a matter of the royal Swedish
court.

[4] Both
transcripts use the term consilio generali, i.e. ‘general council’,
although the Dominican term for the grand meetings of the Order from the
beginning was capitulum generali, ‘general chapter’.

[5] The
first Dominican project in Sigtuna seem to have come
to a sudden stop in 1224 with the initiation of Archbishop Olov Basatömir. It
is disputed whether the construction of a Dominican priory in Sigtuna actually
had begun by then, but a papal letter of indulgence in favour of the
construction was issued in January 1221. The reason for the archbishop’s
dislike to the Friars Preachers is not clear, but probably, it was mainly due
to secure the independence of the young Swedish archbishopric from both the
Danish church centre of Lund and the Gregorian ideas of Rome, where Olov might
have seen the friars as too closely connected to both Lund and Rome. A new
Dominican convent in Sigtuna was not established until 1237 - three years after
Olov’s death.

[6] Knut HolmgerssonLånge was an
ambitious magnate from Uppland, who later managed to take the Swedish thrown in
1229 to 1234. Sko is the name of a place just outside of Sigtuna by Lake
Mälarn, but as it in no way can be termed ‘urban’, it cannot have been very
attractive to the friars, who shortly after left to join the new convent in
Lund. Still, Knut Långe was apparently quite determined to establish a monastic
convent in Sko, and in the early 1230s, after he had become king, he
transferred a convent of Cistercian nuns from Småland to what was to be Sko
Kloster. Knut’s affection for the place is proved by the fact that he himself
chose to be buried there.

[7]One of these original letters is preserved in the
Landeshauptarchiv of Schwerin, Germany. It is a letter dated 6 May 1221 from
Pope Honorius III to the Danish King Valdemar II, in which the pope asks the
king to welcome the Friars Preachers in his kingdom because of all their good
deeds. The letter is published in Diplomatarium Danicum 1. ser. vol. V
nr. 194 and online on Diplomatarium OP Dacie.

[8] Most
probably, they have sailed out from Bruges, which together with Lübeck on the
German north coast constituted the two main points of contact between
Scandinavia and the Continent.

[9] Nidaros or Trondheim was the northernmost city of Norway, and since the
mid-twelfth century the seat of the Norwegian archbishop.

[11] Nidaros is situated more than 1000 kilometres of sea journey away from Frater
Salomon’s goal. Most likely, the exhausted friar went to Archbishop Guttorm to
plead for help, and it was probably much to his content that he this time was
given a travel company going southwards by land. As described, the trip through
the mountainous Norwegian inland was, however, no picnic either, and the trip
from Nidaros to the inner coast of Viken must have taken about a fortnight. The
chronicle indicates that Earl Skule, at the time the most powerful man of
Norway, was the one, who helped Salomon southwards from Nidaros, but it is more
plausible that the earl at this time was in one of his southern bases, Tønsberg
or Oslo, and that it was from here that he helped Salomon further on his way, probably
by ship to Copenhagen (Halvorsen 2002, pp. 242-244).

[12] By omniecclesia (“every
church”), Archbishop Anders Sunesen undoubtedly means every diocese, either within
his archbishopric (i.e. the kingdom of Denmark) or the entire Scandinavia, as
the archbishop of Lund officially still held primacy over the newly established
archbishoprics of Nidaros and Uppsala.

[13] The
famous words of Archbishop Anders is referred slightly
different in the various text versions. The version used here is Tugwell’s
reconstruction. Langebek has »Bene venisti, utinam in omni ecclesia, quæ est
de curia nostra, haberemus unam de tali ordine.« Svanning
also has curia, but unum in stead of unam. Gertz
changed it to »..que est de cura nostra, haberemus vnam domum
de tali ordine.« Whatever the exact wording of Anders originally was, the
meaning seems clear: “It would be good, if every diocese within my jurisdiction
had a house of this order.”

[14] Cardinal
Gregor de Crescentia came
to Denmark as a papal legate in the summer of 1222. The major purpose of his
arrival to Scandinavia seems to have been a disputed coronation in Sweden, but
since the king in question had died a few months before Gregor’s arrival, the
problem had so to speak solved itself (at least for a time). Instead, the
legate was able to travel around Denmark and deal with matters of a more
ecclesiastical character - mainly the classic issue of Danish priests’ problems
with keeping the celibacy. It is probably on this tour around Denmark that
Legate Gregor put good use to Frater Salomon’s language skills.

[15] The
single most disputed word in the whole chronicle is a number, namely the year
of foundation for the convent in Lund. If transcribed correctly, the chronicle
clearly contradicts itself: Frater Salomon was sent to Denmark after the
general chapter in 1221, and now, “the following year at Pentecost”, the friars
are given a locum, which happens in »..anno Domini 1221«!? The
logical reasoning would be that the chronicle has got the last year wrong, and
that it should be saying 1222. Both original transcripts (Langebek and
Svanning) do, however, explicitly dates “the following year” to 1221, so an
error has to go back to a common source, either the original manuscript or the
transcript from the fourteenth century. Gertz concluded that this was the case,
so he simply changed it to 1222 in his reconstructed version, a solution which
was repeated by Gallén, who did not even mention the problem. In fact, since
Gregor did not arrive to Denmark until the summer of 1222, Gallén even
suggested that the following Pentecost must be in 1223 (Gallén 1946, pp. 9-10)!
Tugwell has pointed to the fact that the mentioning of the year 1221 in the end
of the sentence seems unnecessary and inserted, which would point to an error
by the transcriber. Nevertheless, Tugwell himself has chosen the “original”
1221 in his reconstructed version. Certainly, the error-thesis is not without
its own problems, as a different and probably independant source, the Annales
Ripenses, just like the chronicle has the year 1221:»1221.Fratres predicatores Lundis
locum receperunt ab Andrea archiepiscopo.« This is repeated in two later
annals (Annales 1101-1313 and Annales Petri Olavi), which do,
however, probably have their information from the former (all the mentioned
annals are published in Annales Danici medii ævi by E. Jørgensen, Copenhagen
1920).

Still,
I would personally put my money on Gertz’
interpretation: that the donation of a locum in Lund did in fact take
place in 1222.Firstly,
because this year is, to my oppinion, best supported
by the inner chronology of the chronicle. Secondly, I would like to
point to a source, which I have not seen taken into consideration in the whole
question before. On 16 June 1222, Archbishop Anders Sunesen
performed an exchange of property with the cathedral chapter of Lund, by which
he obtained a curia within the city with gardens and other belongings (curiam cum ortisetaliispertinenciissuis), which had earlier belonged to one of the
canons. This is according to a lost letter kept in the cathedral archives,
which content is preserved through a transcript from 1494 (DiplomatariumDanicum 1. ser. vol. V nr. 203). The letter says
nothing about what the archbishop did with the property afterwards, but it is
my convinced guess that this is indeed the locum, which was then given
to the Friars Preachers for the first (lasting) Dominican convent in
Scandinavia. Certainly, the time of the exchange fits perfectly with the words
of the chronicle, and a final support for my feeling is the fact, that the
letter ends by stating that the exchange was indeed witnessed by Cardinal
Legate Gregorius de Crescentio!

The
whole discussion is, of course, a bit academic: the exact year of a convent
foundation will always be questionable, and the archbishop did probably agree
to the establishment of a Dominican convent in Lund already at his first
meeting with Frater Salomon in 1221.

[16]If we are right to assume that the Dominican project in Sigtuna was not given up on before the initiation of
Archbishop OlovBasatömir
in 1224, fraters Simon and Niels are not likely to
have joined the new convent in Lund before the mid-1220s.

[17] Svanning calls him Rano, while Langebek has Ranoldus. In
this case, Gertz has followed Langebek,
whereas most later historians prefer Rano. This form
is also used on his tombstone (see note 18) and two annals.

[18] Also
according to his tombstone, FraterRano was dean in the cathedral chapter of Roskilde, before
he joined the Order of Preachers: »Hic jacetfraterRano, primus prior provincialisfratrumPrædicatorum in Dacia, quondam decanusRoschildensis.« The
stone was found in 1670 on the site of the then demolished Dominican priory in
Roskilde. Unfortunately, the stone itself soon vanished, but the inscription is
preserved by Peder Resen in his Atlas Danicus (c.1674).

[19] No
other source mentions that Rano was elected bishop in
Roskilde. Schück suggested that Dean Rano might have been acting bishop in Roskilde during an episcopal vacancy from 1214 to 1216 (Schück
1916, p. 36). Halvorsen finds it more plausible that Rano could be a rival candidate to NielsStigsen in the episcopal
election in 1225 (Halvorsen 2002, pp. 250-251).

[20] If Rano indeed met with Dominic in Paris, this most probably
have happened in 1219. Halvorsen suggests that it was Jordan, and not Dominic,
that Rano was received by, and that this took place in 1225-26 (Halvorsen 2002,
pp. 250-252).

[21] FraterRano is termed prior prouincialis by Svanning, but
only prior by Langebek. Again in this case, Gertz follow Langebek.
However, there seems to be no doubt that Frater Rano - at least eventually -
became the first prior provincial of Dacia, when the province was established
by the general chapter in 1228. Rano acted as provincial to his death in 1238.
His past in Roskilde and the fact that he chose to be buried at the Roskilde
priory, led Gallén to the likely assumption that the establishment of Friars
Preachers in Roskilde in the early 1230s not least was due to Rano’s personal
effort (Gallén 1946, p. 26).

[22] Practically
nothing is known about the second prior provincial, Frater Analdus, but he is also
mentioned in Bernard Gui’s list of the eight first provincials of Dacia: »Secundus
fuit frater Aynundus, qui non diuicius stetit in officio. Fuit absolutus in
capitulo generali MCCXXXV.« Bernard’s year of
absolution for Analdus is obviously wrong, as Frater Rano is stated to have
died in the office, and several sources date this event to 1238, e.g. Annales
Predicatorum: »1238. Obiit magister ordinis (sic!) Rano. Factus
magister ordinis frater Remundus, prouincialis Dacie Analdus.« The
provincialship of Analdus can be dated to 1238-1241.

Analdus’
successor Frater Absalon is well known as Dacian prior provincial. According to
Bernard Gui, Absalon was a »..vir reuerendus et bonus. Prior prouincialis
fuit annis xx et amplius, priorque prouincialis existens obiit in Rusquillis
anno Domini MCCLIIII vel LV.« Again, Bernard has got the years wrong. Annales
Predicatorum dates Absalon’s election to 1241 and his death - in office -
to 1261: »1261. Obiit prior prouincialis Absalon 4. ferie ante pascha.
Frater Augustinus institutus.« However, Frater Absalon was not acting
provincial in the entire intervening period. Acts of the general chapter in
1250 let us know that the Dacian provincial this year was absolved for reasons
unnamed, but apparently he was soon re-installed.

[23] King Valdemar II of Denmark had defeated an army of Estonian
pagans at Reval in 1219, and a Danish fortress Daneborg or Tallinn
was erected as the central stronghold for Danish supremacy in north-western
Estonia. Soon, rivalry between Danes and the militant order of the German Sword
Brothers (led by Bishop Albert of Riga) broke out and threatened the entire
Christianization of Balticum. For this reason, Cardinal William of Modena was
sent to the North in 1225-27 and 1228-30 as papal legate in order to reconcile
the two Christian parties. Alledgedly, William had been a personal friend of
Dominic, and at both legation journeys he seems to have advocated the use of
Dominican friars in the Baltic mission. In 1227, the Sword Brothers gained
entry to Reval and started the construction of a small fortress close to
Daneborg; this is probably the castri minoris that the friars built
their first priory next to. Remnants of the first priory church has been found
in the choir of the present cathedral.

The
relation between the Danes and the Sword Brothers continued to worsen, and when
a new papal legate, Balduin, decided to solve the dispute by putting the
control of Reval directly under the pope, the Sword Brothers rioted. In 1233,
they drove out the last Danes and their suspected allies of the Friars
Preachers. The chronicle is, therefore, not completely true, when it blames the
pagan Estonians for the expulsion of the first Dominican convent
(Walther-Wittenheim 1938, pp. 8-11).

It
should be noted, though, that this tradition does not stand undisputed. Gallén
found that the chronicle’s dating of the events is erroneous, and that the
friars were expelled already in 1227, when the Sword Brothers took power in
Reval (Gallén 1946, pp. 46-47). Tugwell, on the other hand, has suggested that
the year of the first convent foundation was indeed 1239! William of Modena was
back in the Baltic area in 1234-43, where he - with Dominican assistance -
managed to bring about a famous settlement in 1238 (the Stensby Settlement),
which brought the Danes back to Reval. If this is the case, then the chronicle
might be right in blaming the pagans, as the friars then could have been
expelled during a pagan uprising in 1240 (Tugwell 1998, pp. 112-116).

[24] The transcripts has Johannes Theonici, conventu
Schyhitonensi and conventu Skeniensi, which can be corrected to Johannes
Theutonici, conventu Sychtonensi (or Siktunensi)
and conventu Skeningensi.

[25] “The
first prior on the castle” clearly refers to the location next to the fortress
Daneborg/Tallinn on the hill Toompea above the actual town of Reval, but the
second priory of the Friars Preachers was actually constructed in downtown
Reval, at quite a distance from the military area.

Annales Petri Olavi. My name for the annalistic part of
the chronicle of PetrusOlavi’sCollectanea (c.1533-34).Arnamagnæan Collection, University of Copenhagen.Published in ScriptoresRerumDanicarum vol.
I, pp. 171-197. Also published in extracts in AnnalesDanicimediiævi, pp. 206-211.

Annales Predicatorum, a.k.a. Dominican Yearbook, Dominikanerårbogen. A supposedly East Danish
yearbook for the period 916-1263 of Dominican origin with a Swedish
continuation; dated to the 1250-60s. University Library of Uppsala, Sweden.
Published in Scriptores Rerum Danicarum vol. II, pp. 166-168; in Scriptores
Rerum Suecicarum vol. I no. 47; and in Annales Danici medii ævi, pp.
130-131.